Although the forerunner of the modern computer mouse was devised over 40 years ago by Doug Engelbart, the first major commercial implementation was delayed until 1983 with the advent of the Apple Macintosh™ computer. This was followed several years later by the widespread adoption of the Windows™ computer interface with which the computer mouse became an integral peripheral.
Despite this prolonged gestation period and widespread subsequent commercial utilisation, the essential function of the mouse has remained relatively unchanged since its inception.
This design stagnation is all the more striking given the rapid evolution of computer hardware and other peripheral devices in the same period. Many alternative devices have been investigated to provide an interface between the user and the computer and have met with varying degrees of success.
Touch interfaces are now widely used as the primary user interface for mobile computers such as mobile phones, tablets, car infotainment/navigation systems and other devices. Touch interfaces offer a more intuitive and easily adopted user control of a device than traditional controllers and are the first user interface most children will now encounter. Software for these touch-based operating systems is designed around the touch interface and typically offers a sub-optimal form of interaction when using a keyboard and mouse as the mouse and/or keyboard do not offer the same ease of use or myriad functionality of various touches, touch combinations, gestures and the like.
Nevertheless, the keyboard and mouse still serve as the primary input devices for the majority of desktop computers for users wanting precise control on large displays. One reason for the longevity of the mouse design stems from its success in translating hand to eye coordination, the need for virtually no training and an intuitive interface usable by virtually all age groups.
Prior art computer mice suffer a number of disadvantages including:                Scrolling over large distances or moving the mouse pointer over large areas often requires a conventional mouse to be lifted off its support surface and moved in the opposite direction to avoid running out of space.        Stability problems during activation of the mouse buttons increases the likelihood of disturbing the device position during the button ‘clicking’ action as the buttons are typically inclined steeply to match the contour of the hand lying with a ‘palm-grip’ on the mouse.        Precision of movement is a compromise between being able to quickly move over large distances to moving with very precise small movements. This problem has been addressed in some prior art mice by providing a movement input to the computer that is proportional to the speed of movement in addition to position. However, precision control of small user interface elements can be very difficult, particularly for users with reduced dexterity. Moving small increments or selecting small portions of text or data is difficult.        Moving between user interface elements typically requires a mouse movement to the element and then a click to select or a keyboard input. When there are many small user interface elements this can make selecting the desired element difficult. Alternatively, using the keyboard to cycle through the elements to the desired element is manually onerous as the user has to press a keyboard many times or hold down the key and carefully time the release.        
The documents WO2014/009933 and WO/2006/080858 by Odgers et al. are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
PCT published document WO2014/009933 by Odgers et al. describes a small computer mouse with the ability to provide various touch inputs to a touch-based operating system by tilting the mouse and performing gestures or other actions. The Odgers et al. mouse offers an advanced mouse, particularly suited for use with mobile computers or computers with an operating system accepting touch inputs. However, the Odgers et al. is limited in overall functionality compared with some mice optimised for gaming or productivity uses.
In gaming and productivity applications, it's desirable to have numerous buttons that can be configured to provide keyboard key presses or combinations/sequences of key presses i.e. macros. However, too many buttons will require additional space on the mouse and can reduce the ease in which the user can manipulate the mouse. There is therefore a balance to be made between the number and position of independent buttons and the space available on the mouse. Computer mice are also typically limited to binary (i.e. press/release) buttons, a rotary scroll-wheel and an optical or similar sensor for tracking XY movement over a desk or other work surface. Some computer mice use gyroscopes and/or accelerometers as an alternative movement sensor system to the typical optical sensor, examples of such devices are described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,821,494B2 by Tsai et al or the Gyration® air mouse disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,825,350A by Case et al. and are commonly known as an ‘air mouse’.
It would be advantageous to provide a mouse with advanced functionality.
It is an object of the present invention to address the foregoing problems or at least to provide the public with a useful choice.
All references, including any patents or patent applications cited in this specification are hereby incorporated by reference. No admission is made that any reference constitutes prior art. The discussion of the references states what their authors assert, and the applicants reserve the right to challenge the accuracy and pertinency of the cited documents. It will be clearly understood that, although a number of prior art publications are referred to herein, this reference does not constitute an admission that any of these documents form part of the common general knowledge in the art, in New Zealand or in any other country.
It is acknowledged that the term ‘comprise’ may, under varying jurisdictions, be attributed with either an exclusive or an inclusive meaning. For the purpose of this specification, and unless otherwise noted, the term ‘comprise’ shall have an inclusive meaning—i.e. that it will be taken to mean an inclusion of not only the listed components it directly references, but also other non-specified components or elements. This rationale will also be used when the term ‘comprised’ or ‘comprising’ is used in relation to one or more steps in a method or process.
Further aspects and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the ensuing description which is given by way of example only.